Are Intelligence Agencies Using Media As Puppets?

Are some elements in the intelligence agencies using media as puppets? This is a conclusion that is being reached by some analysts based on recent news articles published by The News (Jang Group).

Earlier this week, investigative editor for The News Ansar Abbasi wrote the article titled ‘Ex-MI chief, commanders Quetta, Pindi involved’ which claims that Lal Masjid operation and Bugti killing both were the responsibility of Pervez Musharraf alone as he had bypassed GHQ.

Analysis of this article by blogger named Peja Mistri concludes that the article is actually part of an internal struggle within the military establishment and attempt to clear the army name regarding Lal Masjid and Bugti, possibly to ease the concern of ideological factions within the military. Whatever the intent of the article, the question has been raised whether Ansar Abbasi is writing news articles to inform the public or is a puppet for intelligence PR.

This question was raised again today when the same reporter Ansar Abbasi published the article ‘5,000 Jiyalas likely to join Sindhi police‘. When Abbasi interviewed Sindh Inspector General Police, Sultan Salahuddin Babar Khattak, he was told in detail the process for publicly advertising for applicants and determining final results based on merit. So what is Ansar Abbasi’s source for this conspiracy?

According to the article Ansar Abbasi was told this conspiracy by ‘an official source in the Sindh government’ who told him that “the Sindh chapter of an elite intelligence agency had also raised similar apprehensions and reported to its headquarter”. With only this evidence, Ansar Abbasi accepts the conclusion that only the intelligence agency is giving him correct information.

Like other parts of the country, the province of Sindh, whose capital city Karachi saw one of the worst terrorist attacks on Thursday, is in dire need of professional police, a well-trained investigation department and skilled prosecution; however, political considerations of rulers are pushing things from bad to worse.

The agencies have always had personnel on their payrolls operating as reporters, anchors, and ‘analysts’ ever since the Ayub Khan dictatorship in the 1960s. Respected journalist and author, late Zamir Niazi, in his book, The Web of Censorship, suggests that the agencies recruited a number of ‘journalists’ during the Ayub dictatorship, specifically to check leftist sentiments that were all the rage among journalists at the time.

Then during the Z.A. Bhutto regime, Niazi hints that the populist government and the conservative ‘establishment’ fought a battle of ideas through paid journalists. But the phenomenon of agency-backed journalists upholding the military establishment’s agenda and ideology in the press really came to the fore during the Ziaul Haq dictatorship in the 1980s.

As left-leaning journalists were forced to exit newspapers during the Zia dictatorship, the corridors of these newspaper offices were suddenly stormed by large groups of pro-establishment personnel, mainly consisting of anti-Bhutto journalists and pro-Jamaat-i-Islami (JI) men.

With the role of the ISI and other intelligence agencies expanding due to Pakistan’s direct involvement in the so-called ‘anti-Soviet Afghan jihad,’ many of these journalists were brought under the wings of various agencies, triggering a trend that still disfigures prominent sections of mainstream Pakistani media. What’s more, between early and late 1980s, the agencies were also able to plant men in the administration and finance departments of various mainstream media groups.

Journalists must remain steadfast about their independence and transparent about their facts. They should ask if a story is about police recruiting process, why is an intelligence agent giving some information? What is he trying to achieve? Reading Ansar Abbasi’s articles one is likely to conclude that Ansar Abbasi believes intelligence agents are simply honest angels who have come to give him some secrets out of their own kindness.

Certainly Ansar Abbasi would be furious if news was being written not based on facts but under direction of PPP leadership. So why is it different if the direction is coming from intelligence agencies? Journalism cannot be free if it is not independent. If reporters are writing front page stories at the direction of intelligence agencies, they have stopped being journalists and become propagandists. Actually, even the perception of such shenanigans is enough to destroy the credibility of the media.

Friendly journalists – Mr Zardari’s supporters believe that cancelling the trip would not have helped him. “He would have been remembered and criticised even if there were no floods in the country,” said Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani on Thursday. And indeed, the current anti-Zardari campaign in the media started before the floods hit the headlines. The criticism began after British Prime Minister David Cameron made remarks in India on 28 July where he accused some in Pakistan of “looking both ways”, exporting terror to neighbouring countries. On 31 July, Pakistan’s Geo TV reported that the chief of the ISI intelligence service, Lt Gen Ahmed Shuja Pasha, had cancelled a scheduled trip to the UK because of Mr Cameron’s remarks, but Mr Zardari was continuing with his planned trip. Pakistan’s ubiquitous TV news presenters began questioning President Zardari’s patriotism and personal integrity.

The print media was not far behind. While President Zardari’s European tour had been “reduced to a pleasure trip” after Mr Cameron’s remarks, “the army reacted in a timely and dignified manner” by cancelling the ISI chief’s UK visit, an editorial comment in the Pakistan Observer newspaper said. The News newspaper called Mr Zardari’s visit a “pursuit of his own dynastic aggrandizement”. The floods only intensified this initial criticism. Two significant developments took place on Thursday. Firstly, Bilawal Bhutto denied he was planning to address the Pakistan Peoples’ Party rally in Birmingham, one of the main reasons for Mr Zardari’s trip.

Secondly, Prime Minister Gilani informed journalists that the ISI chief had not, in fact, scheduled a visit to the UK in the first place. Many quarters insist Bilawal Bhutto’s “cancellation” of an appearance at the Birmingham show may be the result of a rethink on the part of Mr Zardari’s advisers to minimise political damage. But what about the confusion over the story about the ISI chief’s visit to the UK? The initial report on Geo TV had come from mysterious, unnamed sources. And even more mysteriously, the army’s media wing – which normally keeps a hawkish eye on the news, correcting reports at the first possible stage – had not stepped in to clarify the report. The ties between the military and the media are strong. The military often use the media to protect its hold on the giant corporate empire which it has built. In the 1980s the military did this through open censorship. Since the 1990s it has evolved subtler ways.

It controls almost all access to big stories, and has therefore been able to raise a corps of “friendly” journalists who now control most key jobs in Pakistani media due to their “contacts”. President Zardari’s supporters suggest the media could have made up the story of the ISI cancelling its trip to the UK in order to spark an anti-Zardari campaign, which intensified as the scale of the flood damage became clear. REFERENCE: Criticism of Zardari in Pakistan hides a political game By M Ilyas Khan
BBC News, Islamabad 7 August 2010 Last updated at 15:10 GMT http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-10901583

Umar Cheema and Ansar Abbasi, editor investigation of The News, were the first recording their statements as the Commission was set up for fact-finding with respect to the torture on Cheema and threats issued to Ansar Abbasi by the same attackers. Cheema, in his statement, said he took a considerable time in determining the alleged involvement of a particular intelligence agency in attack on him. He said the following four factors helped him in pointing fingers towards the said agency: information gathered from different sources about the culprits; his experience of dealing with that particular agency; the perception as well as history of that agency. He also gave the name of those agency officers who either met or contacted him during this year for ‘brotherly advice’. Ansar Abbasi said he was not so optimistic that the culprits would be apprehended, given the half-hearted measures of the government. He suggested that the head of particular intelligence agency should be directed to investigate into the matter and determine who were the culprits, regardless they belong to his agency or from outside the agency.

ISLAMABAD: A senior member of The News Investigation Cell, Umar Cheema, was picked up in cloak and dagger style in the wee hours of Saturday by unknown but extremely professionally trained persons, beaten black and blue, humiliated beyond one’s comprehension, made to strip his clothes, hung upside down, remained in the illegal custody in a “safe house” for hours and finally thrown out on roadside at Talagang, 120 kilometres from Islamabad with a shaved head and a threatening message for Ansar Abbasi to be the next to face the music.

The Jang Group and quite a few of its journalists were getting serious threats from different government quarters for quite some time but it was Umar Cheema who got the brutal handling from what appeared to be an intelligence agencies operation, given the confidence and impunity with which it was carried out. The kidnappers hurled abuses at the chief justice, cursed the editor-in-chief of the Jang Group and left a serious warning with Cheema for Editor Investigations Ansar Abbasi. The kidnappers also threatened that Ansar Abbasi’s son might be kidnapped if the stories against the government were not stopped. “This is a warning and if you go to media, we will meet you again” Cheema quoted a kidnapper adding: “Our next target is Ansar Abbasi, your boss”. Cheema narrated the kidnappers also hurled abuses at the chief justice of Pakistan. To add insult to injury, the kidnappers were continuously making video clips of Cheema along with still photographs. This exercise continued for about six hours when Cheema was taken near Talagang, an area around 120 kilometres away from Islamabad and was thrown on the roadside. His car was parked at the spot. He was given Rs100 to return to Islamabad, with his head and eyebrows shaved. Cheema was also offered a glass of milk with something slightly orange in colour mixed in it, which relieved him of some pain. Cheema said during the entire exercise he remained handcuffed and blindfolded except when his head was being shaved and when he was being photographed. “I was asked to make naked poses for photographs,” Cheema narrated. He mentioned that he was also asked where Ansar Abbasi lived.

ISLAMABAD: The case of newly discovered 11 missing persons, presently being heard by the Supreme Court, is yet another reminder of how callously intelligence agencies of the country operate without showing any respect to rule of law.

The saga of missing persons seems to be getting more and more complicated with every passing day as the governments, whether federal or provincial, political parties and parliament are simply incapable or indifferent to providing the needed support to the Supreme Court to keep intelligence agencies under check and to make them behave as per the law of the land.

Illyas Siddiqui, the attorney of these 11 persons, insists that the Lahore High Court had ordered the release of these 11 persons on July 21, and on July 28, the orders of the court were received by the Adiyala Jail’s superintendent but instead of releasing them, the jail authorities handed them over to intelligence agencies on July 29, from the main gate of the jail. He also referred to a video evidence to prove his point.

Siddiqui did not precisely name as to which intelligence agency had abducted these persons, all of whom were acquitted in terrorism cases, including rocket attack on the Pakistan Aeronautical Complex, Kamra, anti-aircraft shots fired at a plane carrying former President Pervez Musharraf and suicide attacks on the bus of an intelligence agency in Rawalpindi and at the main entrance of the GHQ.

A deputy attorney general told the apex court that none of the three leading intelligence agencies — ISI, MI and IB — have in their custody any of these missing persons. The Punjab government authorities also don’t admit that the acquitted persons were handed over to any of the intelligence agencies but say that all the persons were released as per the high court’s order.

The then Home Secretary, Nadeem Hasan Asif, said that after their acquittal by the court in terrorism cases, the Punjab government, on the recommendation of CID, kept them under detention, initially under Maintenance of Public Order (MPO) and later by invoking the Anti-Terrorism Act.

But when the LHC set aside these detention orders, Nadeem told The News, the jail authorities were asked to release all the acquitted persons. When asked, Nadeem said that none of the intelligence agencies, including ISI, MI and IB, had approached him either to keep these persons under detention or hand them over to the spy agencies.
On the files of the provincial government, all these detainees were released from the Adiyala Jail. However, when they were to be released, quite a reasonable number of their relatives were waiting outside the Adiyala Jail to receive their acquitted relatives. The superintendent and the deputy superintendent of Adiyala Jail have already been arrested from the Supreme Court following the court’s order.

No matter what the government files read, some of the provincial government authorities do believe that these 11 persons would have been in the illegal custody of the intelligence agencies.

Six out of these 11 persons are those who were acquitted in a case of attack on the ISI bus near Hamza Camp on the morning of November 24, 2007, killing 17 persons and injuring 35 others. According to media reports, the Punjab Police had held the intelligence agencies responsible for their acquittal on grounds of non-cooperation and mishandling of the case.

The report said that these six people were first picked up by intelligence agencies and were latter handed over to the Punjab Police after almost nine months of detention with not a single evidence provided to police and the spy agencies even refused to share any information gathered from the illegal detainees. These reports were carried by the national press in June this year and neither the Punjab Police nor the ISPR or any intelligence agency had rebutted the news.

Besides Cheema and Ansar Abbasi who was also sent threatening messages, six journalists have recorded their statements narrating their harassment in the past by intelligence agencies. Geo TV anchor Hamid Mir, Kamran Shafi, a Dawn columnist, Sarmad Manzoor, chief coordinator of SAFMA, Shakeel Anjum, senior journalist of The News, Azaz Syed, investigative reporter of Dawn TV and Shakil Turabi, editor of SANA news agency, are among those who recorded statements before the judicial commission.

Musharraf struck with Benazir Bhutto’s world-infamous NRO deal just to stick to power for five more years. It created turmoil and chaos in the country and the nation is facing its repercussions today. This deal has given boost to corruption in our country. Musharraf is welcome to Pakistan. His illusions would turn into disillusions as soon as he arrives back. Expecting a sea of people welcoming him upon his return, he may find himself behind the bars. No matter from where he gains the strength, the people of Pakistan want to see him punished for the crimes he committed. Our disappointment from the present rulers, do not make Musharraf a choice of future. He tenders an apology for what he called his past mistakes but we demand his trial under Article 6 of the Constitution and other offences that he committed. A day before the launching of his party, he warned that the country is at risk of a new military coup and suggested the recipe of the Army’s constitutional role in politics. He termed it the only solution if Pakistan wants stability and a system of check and balances in democratic structure. Instead of being ashamed of what he did in the past and how he misused the institution of the Army and the military led intelligence agencies, including the MI and ISI, to strengthen his misrule at the cost of the national interest, Musharraf has set his eyes on the military under General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani to get a strong shoulder for his re-entry into the Pakistani politics.

Enough is enough message to government.Governments keeping mum over intrusive policies of a foreign power towards Pakistan targeting the Pakistan Army its prime intelligence agency the ISI and the countrys nuclear programme has left no option for the powerful establishment but to defend the national interest of Islamabad without much worrying about foreign or local reaction.The recent dismissal of the Kerry Lugar Bill in its present shape by the corps commanders meeting and the on going crackdown against foreign and local security agencies in and around the federal capital convey Rawalpindis clear message that enough is enough and there will be no compromise on ISI no give and take on the nuclear programme and no politicisation of the military establishment.
Last year there were serious apprehensions raised and even shared with some leading politicians of the country about Asif Ali Zardari and if he after becoming the President of Pakistan would show the guts to resist foreign game plan to de nuclearise Pakistan by weakening the ISI and hurting the military those apprehensions could be subsided.Then one of the leading political leaders told me in the presence of a key party man that he was conveyed by the establishment that anti Pakistan foreign powers would expect from the new civilian government to make key changes in the military including that of the Army Chief DG ISI DG Strategic Planning Division etc bring the nuclear programme under the civilian control and reform the ISI.The leader also said that he could not trust the head of the state and admitted that a powerful country was after Pakistan and its nuclear programme but said that he would not like to do anything because he did not trust the establishment either because of his own past experiences.

The coming weeks and months however showed the things unraveling as was apprehended.The first piece of evidence came in the shape of governments decision to bring the prime military led intelligence of the country ISI under the control of Interior Ministry.The notification was issued the day Prime Minister Yusuf Raza Gilani flew for Washington via London in his first official tour to the US.However by the time he arrived at Dallas airport the notification had been cancelled.But the talks about reformation of ISI continued.In the meantime a PPP Senator now sidelined was told by a senior general that the establishment was getting vibes about an effort to transfer the countrys nuclear apparatus from under the militarys control to the civilian.“This will only be possible over our dead bodies ” the PPP Senator was told but he never conveyed this to the partys high command.
But later what we saw was a major cut in the budget of the strategic institutions including Pakistan Atomic Energy Commission (PAEC) Kahuta Research Laboratories and others.Not an ordinary but one of the top officials of one of these strategic institutions had shared with me some months back his extreme concern about this budgetary cut of the countrys nuclear programme and how seriously it was denting what was generally considered as the topmost priority of Pakistan.He was really feeling helpless and extremely concerned.Till recently everything was behind the scene and if there was any tension it was not visible as such.The recent operation against Inter Risk was the consequence of ISIs work.There is no explanation as to why the Inter Risk got licences of sophisticated weapons.The Deputy Commissioner Islamabad office record showed the Inter Risk to have received gifted foreign arms from a local tribesman in Bannu.
What added to the establishments worries were the repeated incidents of clashes between the foreign diplomats and local officials in Islamabad.The foreigners in clear violation of law of the land were also carrying with them arms and in one case even pointed gun at an Islamabad police inspector.The ISI was keen to see the foreign diplomat/official who pointed the gun at the Islamabad police inspector to have been declared as persona non grate but before the Foreign Office could proceed in this case the Islamabad police made a compromise with the embassy of the foreign country.In another case which shook the establishment was the Islamabad polices initiative to lodge a formal complaint against the ISI after the agency official questioned four foreigners who were caught red handed carrying sophisticated weapons near Peshawar More Islamabad.However later the Interior Ministry was made to remove the SP on whose order the ISI was booked.The same SP was also said to be instrumental while letting go scot free another vehicle carrying four foreigners who were wearing Taliban like look.
Such repeated incidents left no option for the establishment but to check the crossing of limits by the foreigners.Operation against Inter Risk is a clear message to all and sundry that no one would be allowed to raise private army here.And Blackwater in any disguise is not welcomed in Pakistan.While the Islamabad police on the instructions of the security agencies was carrying out operation against Inter Risk the Interior Ministry was clueless as to what was happening on ground.However later the Interior Ministry was made to cancel the licence of the Inter Risk.While at home we were facing a subtle flooding of Blackwater operatives in Washington the Kerry Lugar Bill was in the making.No proper consultation was done with concerned quarters here to assess as to what final shape the bill would take.
Besides the media and amongst politicians many even in the establishment believe that most of the “contentious” conditionalities concerning army and the security agencies were included in the bill later.The bill looks at the Pakistans nuclear programme with abhorrence paves the way for politicisation of the military by allowing the government to have its greater role in army promotions and appointments suggests (indirectly) civilian control over the ISI for its possible reformation talks of furthering the presence of foreigners in Pakistan condemns al Qaeda and Taliban and the Lashkar e Tayyaba but is silent about Tehrik e Taliban Pakistan and other local terrorist networks including Lashkar e Jhangvi that are hurting only Pakistan but not the US India etc.Instead as Pakistan witnessed the latest terrorist attack on GHQ reports of Pakistani intelligence agencies suggest that these terror networks are getting support from across the borders in India and Afghanistan.

ISLAMABAD: Long-drawn-out persuasion by the top brass of Pakistan`s elite intelligence agencies and high-ranking officials failed to convince a resolute chief justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry to step down before a presidential reference was filed against him.

He stood like a rock, ready to face the challenge, in the hours-long persuasive sessions. A family source close to the “non-functional” chief justice quoted Justice Chaudhry as saying that during the critical Friday meeting with the president, he was given two options by General Pervez Musharraf — resign or face the reference.

“I opted not to succumb,“ the source quoted him as telling the tale of his five-hour stay in the Army House on Friday. After the suspended chief justice told the president that he would never step down, the source revealed that almost 18 officials, including the top brass of the intelligence agencies, kept on swaying him, one after the other, to avail the first option, but he chose the hard one.

He, however, made it clear that he was not mistreated at any stage of the extended sessions. He was also offered lunch. He told his friends and acquaintances, who were able to meet him before the present security cordon around his official residence was clamped by the government, that he had immediately made up his mind that he would not bow out.

The source, who is still in contact with the chief justice and his family because of a not yet tracked communication means, said Justice Chaudhry had also told his sympathisers that the “charge sheet“ read by the president was the replica of the much-condemned open letter of a Supreme Court lawyer, who, it is generally believed, was written as a precursor to the reference.

After an almost five-hour stay in the Army House and following his consistent refusal to quit, he was allowed to go. One obvious change he immediately noticed as soon as he came to board his staff car was the missing of the chief justice’s flag from his official limousine. Acting Chief Justice Javed Iqbal took the oath of his office at a time when the chief justice was in the Army House.

When Justice Chaudhry came back, the world had changed for him altogether. Although the government claims that the suspended chief justice is not under house arrest, within hours of his return from the Army House, the top judge`s official residence was cordoned off, the telephone lines were disconnected and even the available mobile phones were taken away. The television cable was working till Saturday morning, but it was also cut off later.

The suspended chief justice was also not provided with newspapers although he was getting the crux of the media coverage on his issue through a lone communication mean that is still breathing. Except those allowed to meet him on Sunday as has happened in selected cases, no one can get in or out.

“It`s a pity that the man who spent all his life in delivering justice to people is now himself in need of justice,“ the source said, adding that the suspended chief justice is treated in a manner as if he were involved in some major corruption case. “But Justice Iftikhar`s track record speaks of his financial integrity,“ the source said, adding that “Pakistan is not the property of a few in power; this is our country.“

The source said the only hope left is the media that should raise its voice for justice and it is certain that the people of conscience will come forward and do their maximum to stop this injustice.

When one tries to keep everybody happy through lies then this effort is often result in worst kind of Intellectual Dishonesty of which Mr Ansar Abbasi, the Senior Correspondent of Jang Group of Newspapers is a glaring example in particular and Jang Group in general. READ ANSAR ABBASI ON ISI AND THEN READ HIS OWN NEWSPAPER/GROUP ON ISI and Pakistan Army.

Although October 12, 1999 events were the outcome of the known mistrust between the then prime minister and the Army chief following the Kargil adventure of General Musharraf, in the present scenario the incumbent Army chief, General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, is widely respected for his professionalism and pro-democracy stance. General Kayani is not only highly popular within the Army but is also admired by political parties for the excellent role that he had played during the last year’s general elections and later on the occasion of the judges’ restoration. In a situation when the Army as an institution has regained its respect and there is absolutely no sign of the military’s attempt to destabilise the democratic set-up, any effort by the president to make key changes in the Army top command would be extremely dangerous for the system. Last year, the government’s abrupt shifting of the ISI under the Interior Ministry was unacceptable to all and sundry, including the media, which resulted into the immediate cancellation of the government’s notification. Perhaps foreseeing the dangers ahead, different views were being expressed in the media as a reaction to the president’s speech such as, “There are only so many possibilities about where the threat Mr Zardari keeps referring to can come from. With his public comments, Mr Zardari may in fact be alarming the persons in those institutions that they could be the target of impending attacks themselves and, therefore, need to strike before they are struck against. Our advice: put up or shut up. The president is supposed to be a symbol of the federation, a unifying force rather than a hyper-partisan figure fuelling conspiracy theories. More presidential, less political – that’s what the county needs from Mr Zardari.” REFERENCE: Why the ‘put up or shut up’ calls to Zardari? Wednesday, December 30, 2009 Comment By Ansar Abbasi http://www.thenews.com.pk/top_story_detail.asp?Id=26362

ISLAMABAD: The Pakistan Army has presently more than 125 general officers in its strength. While a lot is said and written about the civilian bureaucracy, not many know about the military bureaucracy, which is today far more bloated compared to what it was a few decades back. Today we have three full four-star generals, 30 three-star generals also called lieutenant generals while the number of two-star generals — major generals — is said to be almost 100. This number, however, includes those serving generals who are also presently occupying civilian posts including the Presidency. Although the serving general officers currently holding civilian positions are not in a huge number,there are hundreds of retired soldiers including dozens of ex-generals who are now occupying civil service positions including the key posts like ambassadors in Pakistan’s missions abroad, heads of authorities, corporations and departments. A list of ex-servicemen, serving against the civil posts, last presented before the Parliament and also published by some newspapers included almost 600 names. According to sources, the number of General officers in the pre-1965 Pakistan Army was about 30. But in the aftermath of the 1965 war the military was restructured and new formations were raised that took the number of general officers to almost 60.

The 1971 war yet again resulted into further growth in the number of General officers. However, it was during General Ziaul Haq’s tenure when a major expansion of army was done. During the present military rule, these sources said, the expansion was done in two areas — Army Strategic Force Command and Air Defence System. Promotions in the army and in the topmost ranks, it is said, are strictly done against the posts that are sanctioned by the government. “There is no such thing that you start promoting the officers and sending them to the civilian side,” a source said adding that besides clear vacancies certain promotions are made against “pool vacancies”. Unlike the distortions that are characteristics of the civilian bureaucracy and which furthered during the last eight years, the systems in the military have not been played with. While in the civilian bureaucracy no top mandarin gets retired and is generously allowed extension in complete violation of the law and rules, the Pakistan Army, during the last eight years, has seen just three cases of extensions. These exceptional military extensions include the case of General Musharraf himself who continues to be the Army Chief since 1998. The second extension that the top General granted during his rule was that of his Chief of Staff Lt Gen (retd) Hamid Javaid, who when offered another year’s extension a few years back preferred to hang his boots instead of depending on a leased military life. The third case of extension is that of Lt Gen Khalid Kidwai, who is presently heading the strategic planning division. Kidwai was to retire last year but Musharraf gave him one-year extension reportedly because of his technical assignment.

Amongst the full Generals that we presently have in the military, General Pervez Musharraf, who for being the Chief of Army Staff, tops the list. The two other four star Generals include General Ahsan Saleem Hayat, Vice Chief of Army Staff and General Ehsan ul Haq, Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee.

Former highly controversial deputy ISI chief Maj-Gen (retd) Nusrat Naeem is the latest addition to this bunch whose ‘adventurism’ and ‘innovations’ had finally led to their boss’s ouster. Naeem, however, when contacted categorically denied this charge and said he met the incumbent president only once during Asif Zardari’s visit to the ISI office before he was elected as the head of the state. It is a strange coincidence that Nusrat Naeem, Sharifuddin Pirzada, the Law Ministry and the Presidency both in 2007 as well as in 2009 are standing on the same position vis-a-vis the superior judiciary of the country. At that time, however, Musharraf enjoyed the complete support of the establishment, which is neutral today. According to sources, Nusrat Naeem, who had played an active role under Musharraf to target the independent judiciary, including Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, has been in contact with President Zardari even before his becoming the head of the state. One of these sources even insist that last time the former deputy DG ISI met the president, was only a week when in the late evening he was escorted to the presidency by one of its security officials named Col (retd) Babar.

The sources also alleged that Nusrat Naeem’s hobnobbing with the president also led to the latter’s negativity towards Army chief General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, who has been Naeem’s boss in the ISI during Musharraf days. A respected retired lieutenant general, who was course mate of General Kayani, told this correspondent recently on condition of not being named that once Nusrat Naeem, after being superseded by Kayani, was using what he termed foul language against the Army chief. The retired general said that Naeem was snubbed for the same reason. Naeem, who had sought early retirement after his supersession, when contacted said he never met President Zardari after their only interaction in the ISI when the latter visited the prime agency’s headquarter. He also denied to have ever used foul language against the Army chief and instead showered all sort of praise on General Kayani, whom he dubbed as a highly professional soldier. He also denied to have played any role in poisoning the president against the Army chief. President’s spokesman Farhatullah Babar also denied that Nusrat Naeem was in contact with Zardari or had visited him recently. He believed that these reports were perhaps part of the rumour mongering that was already going on against President Zardari. REFERENCE: Those who sank Musharraf now advising Zardari By Ansar Abbasi Tuesday, January 19, 2010 http://www.thenews.com.pk/top_story_detail.asp?Id=26746

Mr. Ansar Abbasi seldom bother to check history that’s why he miserably fails to even hide his efforts and his motives to save somebody, read news from his very own Jang/The News to expose Mr. Ansar Abbasi.

ISLAMABAD: There were at least a dozen principal players, who had roles in clinching the National Reconciliation Ordinance (NRO) that was issued hours before the 2007 presidential polls in which Pervez Musharraf was re-elected. Apart from the then desperate and cornered Musharraf, Lt-Gen (retd) Hamid Javed, Tariq Aziz, Farooq H Naek, Makhdoom Amin Fahim, Rehman Malik, Safdar Abbasi, the then Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) chief Lt-Gen Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, Chaudhry Shujaat Hussain and Chaudhry Pervaiz Elahi played varying roles, an aide of the then president told The News on condition of anonymity. He said that these actors gave their inputs at different stages in the process of finalising the NRO. The controversial NRO is now before parliament for a final decision about its fate. Petitions are also pending in the Supreme Court. As the story narrated by the former Musharraf aide, who opted to be in the background since his ouster, the substantive talks about quashing corruption and criminal cases against Benazir Bhutto, Asif Ali Zardari and a multitude of others were held when Musharraf met the Pakistan Peopleís Party (PPP) chairperson for the first time in Abu Dhabi in July 2007. The meeting followed a hectic campaign by senior American and British officials to bring about a rapprochement between Musharraf and Benazir Bhutto and intense talks between Hamid Javed with Benazir Bhutto and her confidants in London. As Musharraf sought PPPís support in his October 2007 re-election, Benazir Bhutto expressed willingness, by boycotting the polls, but demanded two things in exchange ñ undoing of the embargo on her to serve as prime minister for the third term and all corruption and criminal cases registered in Pakistan and abroad against her, Zardari and others. REFERENCE: The many other players of NRO saga Thursday, October 22, 2009 By Tariq Butt http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=204448

Interestingly, General Kayani was the only senior officer present with President Pervez Musharraf when he had the historic meeting with Benazir Bhutto at the Musharraf palace in the suburbs of Abu Dhabi in July this year. Then he was the director general inter-services intelligence (ISI). General Kayani also took part in the interactions and deliberations with different political leaders, including Benazir Bhutto, for quite sometime till his promotion as the four-star general. The meeting at the Presidency was also attended by the prime intelligence agencies and other heads of the law-enforcement agencies. The initial report that was submitted to the high-level meeting disclosed that Benazir Bhutto was hit by the ball bearings of the suicide bomber’s jacket that hit and cut her jugular vain. REFERENCE: It was not a bullet, president told at high-level meeting Friday, December 28, 2007 http://www.thenews.com.pk/print3.asp?id=11928

Here’s what I wrote two years ago: “By now, the dynamics set in place by America seem immutable: what Washingtonwants, it gets. Never mind about the people of Pakistan and what they wanted. Benazir Bhutto made Washington her second home this summer. And it paid off. The State Department turned a brokerage house facilitating political deals between Bhutto and the Pakistan Army led by General Musharraf’s heir-in-chief, General Kayani. The broker, that is America, stands to reap huge dividends… Secretary of State Rice admitted that America was pressing General Musharraf “very hard” to allow for free and fair elections. When asked if Benazir Bhutto had a role in the future political setup, she answered, “Well, I don’t see why not”. When asked how the corruption cases against Benazir Bhutto would play into the new equation, Condi Rice deflected it by going off on a tangent: “There needs to be a contested parliamentary system, but whether or not she is able to overcome that and whether Pakistanis are willing to allow that is really up to them.” The reason for her gobbledygook response is now as clear as the blue sky. Washington was working around the clock to get Musharraf to pass an ordinance providing amnesty to Bhutto for her alleged corruption. And Ms Rice was the one pushing the general to go for it.” REFERENCE: Last tango in Washington — II Wednesday, October 28, 2009 Anjum Niaz http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=205482

Pakistan’s cadre of elite generals, called the corps commanders, have long been kingmakers inside the country. At the top of that cadre is Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, General Musharrafís designated successor as Army chief. General Kayani is a moderate, pro-American infantry commander who is widely seen as commanding respect within the Army and, within Western circles, as a potential alternative to General Musharraf. General Kayani and other military leaders are widely believed to be eager to pull the Army out of politics and focus its attention purely on securing the country. REFERENCE: If Musharraf falls… Friday, November 16, 2007 US making contingency plans http://www.thenews.com.pk/top_story_detail.asp?Id=11176

Mr. Ansar Abbasi conveniently “forget” that he himself had filed these “Damaging News” against the same ISI/Pak Army in his own newspaper and with full of mistakes and void of any facts.

ISLAMABAD: The announcement of head-money in millions on all the top commanders of the Taliban in Swat presents a perfect case of intelligence agencies’ failure to hunt down the extremist-cum-terrorist networks, as all the top commanders are still wanted and none has been apprehended or killed. Background interactions reveal despite the great challenge the country’s intelligence agencies are confronted with, average and below average defence and police officers have been posted in leading spy agencies, rendering them incompetent. In view of this situation, faulty reports have been generated, which led to wrong decisions. By announcing head-money on the key militant figures, the government has admitted that it has no knowledge of their whereabouts. It was a serious lapse on the part of the government and security agencies that they had launched the Swat operation but without ascertaining as to where the likes of Maulana Fazlullah, Muslim Khan, Ibne Amin and Shah Doraan were. So far, the Army claims to have killed more than 1,000 militants but none of the top militant commanders was included in this huge number of killings. Sources said the top posts, particularly in the military-dominated agencies — the Inter-Service Intelligence (ISI) and the Military Intelligence (MI) — are generally held by career generals, two-star and three-star. However, against the mid-level and most importantly field posts, those defence officers who do not have a promising career are appointed. “Without talented and career officers, the field intelligence apparatus of the country cannot meet the challenge they are entrusted,” a source said, adding only career officers with promising future would prove to be effective spies as in case of failures their career prospects would be affected. Rarely career officers of the level of captain, major and even colonel of the Pakistan Army, Air Force or Navy were posted to the ISI and the MI. Assigning them field positions was simply out of question. The Military Intelligence is a pure Pakistan Army’s baby; however, the ISI despite being a civilian agency is ruled by Army officers, who hold almost all its key positions: whether in the field or at its headquarters at Aabpara. REFERENCE: Head money on top terrorists shows failure of spy agencies By Ansar Abbasi Saturday, May 30, 2009 http://www.thenews.com.pk/top_story_detail.asp?Id=22434

ISLAMABAD: The country’s elite intelligence agency — the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) — has initiated a probe into the Punjab Auqaf Department’s land-leasing controversy. The ISI is digging into the matter to get to one of its former deputy chiefs — a retired major-general, who by using his influence had tried to grab Punjab Auqaf Department’s commercial land on a 30-year lease on nominal rent. Sources said the ISI officials have started contacting various sources to collect details of the case reported in this newspaper. The auction for the Auqaf land in Rawalpindi was scheduled for February 15 but it was cancelled at the eleventh hour after this newspaper reported on the same day. Tens of Kanals of the Auqaf’s commercial land in Rawalpindi was all set to be added to the fortunes of the retired major-general and former deputy of the ISI, and member of the Punjab Public Service Commission in the cancelled auction. REFERENCE: ISI looking for its ex-deputy chief Ansar Abbasi Saturday, February 17, 2007 http://www.thenews.com.pk/top_story_detail.asp?Id=5901

Mr. Ansar Abbasi in his very first story above was behaving like the “Defender of Pakistan Army” whereas the same Mr Ansar Abbasi used to file stories like these and not very long ago:

ISLAMABAD: Serving and retired officers of the armed forces continue to dominate the top civilian set-up and their number has crossed the figure of 500. Despite the Feb 18 election mandate and indications by the army high command that men in uniform were being pulled out, Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani continues with majority of political appointments made by the previous government. Following prime ministerís direction, the Chief of Army Staff General Ashfaq Pervez Kayani has recalled a considerable number of serving Army officers back to the barracks but hundreds of ex-servicemen continue to serve on key government posts that were offered to them by Musharrafís military regime. This is the first-ever civilian set-up to have inherited not only a record number of political appointments but is also continuing with the same. Traditionally new governments do not carry the extra-luggage and resort to termination of the contracts of political appointments made by the previous regime. However, the incumbent regime of Yousuf Raza Gilani seems to be status quo-oriented. While the total number of political appointees runs into thousands, the number of Khakis, both serving and retired, occupying civilian posts, is more than 500. The dominant majority of these appointees fall in the category of ex-servicemen, most of them appointed without prior clearance from the GHQ. A number of serving army officers are presently holding the positions, which have been offered to the military officers traditionally. Details show that more than 50 key civilian posts are currently held by the serving or retired General or their equivalents in the Navy and Air Force; 91 by retired or serving brigadiers or equivalent; while there are hundreds of serving/retired colonels, majors and captains or their equivalent in Navy and Air Force in different civilian institutions.

How qucikly “Ansar Abbasi” Forget and how even more quickly “Jang Group” removes the URL of unwanted News of Ansar Abbasi from its website cache.

ISLAMABAD: No matter who has authored the script of the ongoing Brig Imtiaz tamasha, engulfing the political arena, the establishment that includes the military-led intelligence agencies and the Pakistan Army have emerged as the main villains, presumably as the authors of the fiasco wanted. Nawaz Sharif and his party are uncomfortable; demand for Musharraf’s trial has been sidetracked at least for the time being; the MQM gets into a position where it believes that its stand is vindicated but the Jinnahpur controversy also created an opportunity for its opponents for a much open criticism of the party and its policies; the issues like the scrapping of 17th Amendment have now become more complex with the two leading parties setting up for a political confrontation after the PML-N finds the Presidency behind the current smear campaign against its top leadership; however, President Asif Zardari is least affected by this recently started political wrangling. It rather has favoured him by temporarily silencing the guns that were targeting him and the government from all around for their alleged misrule, on charges of corruption, the sugar scandal and the reported ruining of the state institutions. The PML-N, which is badly hurt by the revelations about the alleged provision of Rs3.5 million to its party chief Mian Muhammad Nawaz Sharif by former ISI chief Lt-Gen (retd) Asad Durrani, is pointing its finger at the president to have been the architect of the get-Nawaz campaign. However, the Presidency has strongly refuted these charges but different presidential aides are issuing the kind of statements that apparently show the presidency is getting amused with the situation. However, what is interesting is the unanimity between all these warring political forces showing their abhorrence over the role of the establishment in country’s politics. But in a strange dichotomy except the PML-N, the other two major warring political forces — the PPP and the MQM — are not interested in proceeding against Gen (retd) Musharraf under Article 6 of the Constitution. As one scans through the debates that took place in different talk shows of various private television channels after the recent emergence of the Jinnahpur controversy, the establishment is found to be the target of all.

The MQM, which had been the most trusted supporter of Gen Musharraf during his nine years rule, says that its Quaid Altaf Hussain is not returning to Pakistan because of the establishment. The PPP, too, said that the military operators and intelligences agencies have not been adhering to the command of the civilian governments whereas the PML-N is of the view that it has repeatedly found the establishment and Army chiefs overstretching their mandate. While appearing as a guest in one of the talk shows, PML-N information secretary Ahsan Iqbal has said it has been a harsh reality in Pakistan that policy decisions on some specific security and international issues have not been taken with the consultation or consent of the civilian government. He quoted the Kargil issue as one example and urged upon the need of rationalising the power structure in such a manner that no step could be taken against the wishes of the democratic government.

He said the PML-N differed with former Army chief Gen (retd) Aslam Beg after he issued a statement on the Gulf war that did not match the government’s policy. He said similarly Gen (retd) Asif Nawaz exceeded from the mandate he was given before launching the military operation against criminals, dacoits and anti-social elements in Sindh in 1992. Another Army Chief Gen (retd) Jehangir Karamat, he said, was removed because of his statement on the setting up of National Security Council. He said the PML-N government differed with Gen (retd) Musharraf on the Kargil issue. Senior PML-N leader Khwaja Muhammad Asif was of the view that the military-led intelligence agencies have been extremely powerful and instrumental in the making and breaking of the government. On the issue of the military operation in Karachi and the target killings there, Khwaja Asif said the agencies were mainly responsible for that. He said in both the 1992-93 and 1995-96 operations in Karachi, these were the military intelligence agencies that had played the important role. Interestingly, it was Khwaja Asif, who admitted that had the agencies not been so powerful MQM Quaid Altaf Hussain would have now been in Pakistan. Khwaja Asif said Altaf Hussain’s apprehensions towards the intelligences agencies, are barring him to come back and lead his party, which according to the N-leader would serve the political culture better.

Khwaja Asif also pointed out that the present situation in the tribal areas, Balochistan, Northern Areas and in Southern Punjab is also the outcome of what the agencies did during the last 20-22 years. The PML-N leaders have been distancing itself from the 1992 military operation against the MQM and insisted that it was the Army which had overstepped. In return, the MQM leaders, too, were mainly complaining to the PML-N and its leader Nawaz Sharif over his silence and the failure to stop the 1992 military operation against the MQM. MQM leader Haider Abbas Rizvi endorsed Khwaja’s views and said Hakim Saeed was killed by the agencies but the MQM was blamed for his murder. He lamented that the MQM workers were killed in an extra-judicial manner; military courts were created to try Muttahida workers, who were punished illegally and in violation of the Constitution through summary trials by these courts. Rizvi said in the 1992 operation what he called the Haqiqi terrorists were riding in military jeeps during the Army’s operation against the MQM. “It was all planted,” he said, and lamented the then-prime minister could not do anything to stop the operation.

Wasim Akhtar, another MQM leader, said in one the private channel that it’s a pity that the largest political parties of the country are today still dependent on Army and America. Dr Nadeem Ahsan of the MQM said MQM workers do not want Altaf Hussain to come back. He said the MQM Chief’s life is facing threats from the enemies of Pakistan. When asked to name these enemies, he pointed to both internal and external forces. When further probed, Dr Nadeem Ahsan initially named the Taliban and later said, “There are some other forces too. You can also name establishment.” When asked if the MQM fears from the establishment, he said, “Yes”. PPP information secretary Fauzia Wahab, too, in a talkshow talked of the political influence of the ISI which, according to her, grew after the agencies exposure in the Afghan war against former Soviet Union. Wahab, who is generally considered as her master’s (President) voice, said during the Afghan war the ISI became very resourceful and developed new technologies, which the agencies has to use somewhere to prove its worth. Referring to the history and also finding it true in the present day Pakistan, she said one thing is clear that in Pakistan democracy never got strengthened and the civilian authority has never been maintained. She said in her view there does not exist any central authority. Fauzia Wahab also added the 1992 operation is the reflection of the fact that the military operators at that time were not ready to concede the supremacy of the civilian leadership. She, however, believed the military interventions can’t be stopped by hanging a dictator but by improving the performance of parliament and through the vision and greater assertion of the political leadership. Dr Firdous Aashiq Awan, another PPP leader, blamed the establishment for the PPP government’s “mistake” to launch operation in Karachi against the MQM in 1995-96. REFERENCE: Establishment — the main target in current fiasco Wednesday, September 02, 2009 Politicians point finger at Army, ISI for debacles; all except the president are losers By Ansar Abbasi

ISLAMABAD: No Mr Altaf Hussain, you are wrong. Your recipe to cleanse the Augean stables is flawed, unconstitutional and simply shocking. Your outburst negates the established principles of rule of law that is mandatory for justice and fair play in any society and for which we have been struggling since March 9, 2007. You have not only unmistakably invited ML but proposed dictatorial rule of one man that would be disastrous for my Pakistan. One’s despondency and disappointment from the Zardari-Gilani government to which Altaf Bhai’s MQM is an integral part is perhaps far more grave than what the MQM chief apparently claims. Undoubtedly the present regime is thoroughly corrupt and the worst example of bad governance. Time has also proved that Prime Minister Gilani is also helpless, hopeless, incompetent and lacks courage and is a mere burden on the system for his inaction and incapability to steer the country away from the challenges facing the nation. This is known to all that democracy is being used by the present rulers to give cover to their corruption, misrule and bad governance. Everyone knows that Zardari and the bunch of corrupt coterie surrounding him are on a suicide mission and have emerged as the greatest threat to democracy. The question that arises here is if, because of corruption, bad-governance and misrule of the rulers and regime, we should condemn democracy and let another dictator come, it would ruin everything. Targeting democracy would mean bowing down to whims and wishes of one man, moving against our own rights, abrogating Constitution and weakening institutions including independent judiciary and free media. It sounds strange that no-confidence against the system is coming from Altaf Hussain whose party is vital part of the corrupt federal as well as Sindh government. Being part of it, the MQM is bound to share the burden of all the wrongs being done by the Zardari-Gilani duo. Instead of targeting democracy, why don’t Altaf Bhai and his party hit the corrupt government and the corrupt rulers? The MQM, which has served as B-Team of General Musharraf during his nine-year dictatorial rule, should now serve democracy and as a first step get out of the coalition. The party can also exert pressure on the regime to behave by setting the conditions of good governance, across the board accountability and corruption free government if the PPP wants the MQM to stay in the coalition.

Following democratic norms, the MQM has the option of leaving the federal government. It would mean the immediate collapse of the Gilani regime. The PPP, which has just 126 members in the National Assembly and has made the government with the support of MQM, ANP, JUI(F), independents and others, can’t survive if it loses the support of 25 MQM MNAs. The collapse of the government could pave the way for re-adjustments of political divide within the National Assembly. It would mean forming a new government. Otherwise, we have mid-term elections. These are all democratic means to handle the kind of situation we are confronting today. Hatred against Zardari should not be allowed to turn into hatred against democracy. Just to recall Altaf Bhai, the present lot ruling the country had made its way into the corridors of power because of the NRO, which was promulgated and negotiated by the Generals. Therefore, Altaf Bhai, please let the cleansing be done by the system instead of the Generals, who have failed every time they ruled the country. Let’s start differentiating between democracy and government. We have the kind of rulers who have given us the sham democracy. Instead of reverting to the military rule we all should struggle for genuine democracy, genuine people who should serve people instead of serving the rulers. REFERENCE: MQM must push for a change within the system; Altaf Bhai should leave coalition first; force mid-term polls, not invite a dictator Tuesday, August 24, 2010 By Ansar Abbasi http://www.thenews.com.pk/24-08-2010/Top-Story/126.htm Wednesday, September 01, 2010, Ramzan 21, 1431 A.H

ISLAMABAD: In a major political development, the PML-N and the MQM have developed channels of interaction likely to be visible soon when the two parties would not press their respective privilege motions against each other in the National Assembly. However, there still exists a level of hesitation between the two sides to frankly and freely talk about future cooperation, which if matures at a later stage might rattle the Gilani regime. At this stage, both the parties do not have the kind of comfort level where they can discuss the issue of in-house change. Background interaction with some key members of these two political parties reveal that two influential senators, one from each party, are presently in touch with each other to cool down the tempers, which ran high of late after the controversial statement of the MQM Chief Altaf Hussain. A source said that both the parties were inclined not to press their respective privilege motions in the forthcoming session of the National Assembly that was requisitioned by the PML-N to discuss the flood and devastation caused by this natural calamity. “There is also a possibility of the two parties withdrawing their privilege motions,” the source said, adding that after the detailed interview of the MQM chief on Geo and his clarification that his statement did not mean to invite martial law, the controversy stands settled. There is also realisation on both sides that at this critical juncture when almost 20 million Pakistanis are affected by the floods, they should discuss the flood situation in the forthcoming session instead of getting involved into a verbal war of accusations and counter accusations against each other.

When asked about the future cooperation between the two sides for a possible in-house change, a senior MQM leader said that the party would not like to go for any such thing while staying in the government. The Karachi situation and the future of democratic system, according to the MQM leader, are their concerns. “We don’t want to do anything that may shake the system or lead to a deterioration in law and order situation in Sindh,” the MQM source said. However, the MQM is willing to weigh different options. The PML-N too is not showing any immediate sign of taking initiative for an in-house change but the kind of frustration and despondency the party has developed vis-‡-vis the Gilani government is expected to lead to some upheavals in the political arena. The PML-N and the MQM have been coalition partners in both terms of Nawaz Sharif as Prime Minister. However, the relations between the two parties touched all time low when in an APC called by Nawaz Sharif in London in 2007, a resolution was passed against the MQM for its alleged involvement in 12 May, 2007 massacre. REFERENCE: PML-N, MQM relations warming up Wednesday, September 01, 2010 By Ansar Abbasi http://www.thenews.com.pk/01-09-2010/Top-Story/280.htm

On Thursday, February 05, 2009; 2:44 AM….In the Urdu daily Jang of February 2, 2009 there was a column titled “Would Altaf Hussain participate in long march ?”, by the famous journalist Mr. Ansar Abbasi known for his research and investigative journalism. This column was a direct response to MQM’s Quaid Mr. Altaf Hussain’s address to MQM’s rabita committee in London on Jan 27, 2009. During the address Mr. Altaf Hussain put a simple question to Mr. Nawaz Shareef vis-à-vis PCO judges. that “what does the Charter of democracy’s article 3, clause (a) & (b) says about those judges who took oath under the PCO and if Mian sahib can answer this question then MQM too would diligently work with them towards the enforcement of Charter of Democracy.”. But in case Mian Nawaz fails to answer the question then it will be morally binding on him and an obligation to reconsider his decision to participate in long march. Principally & professionally speaking the answer should have come from Mian Nawaz Shareef. Alas it never came; nevertheless Mr. Ansar Abbasi took upon himself to issue a rejoinder. Peoples Party’s Shaheed Chairperson Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto and Mian Nawaz Shareef put their signatures on the Charter of Democracy (COD) comprising of 7 pages, 4 important topics and 36 articles in London on May, 14, 2006. But here we will only talk about the relevant points brought up by Mr. Ansar Abbasi, explained and deliberated upon in the aforementioned column. Mr. Abbasi says that COD’s article 3(a) explains the procedure for appointment of new judges and that Article 3(b) addresses the already appointed judges of higher courts with relevance to their oath taken under PCO.

Indeed this is true that Article 3 (b) addresses the oath taken by superior courts judges under the PCO and this is exactly said in the COD that “No judge shall take oath under PCO and nor shall he take any oath whose language stands at odds with the 1973 constitution’s defined language for oath of judges”.

Let’s read the exact text of the relevant Article from the COD. Under Article 3(a) it says “The recommendations for appointment of judges to superior judiciary shall be formulated through a commission, which shall comprise of the following: (i). The chairman shall be a chief justice, who has never previously taken oath under the PCO.”

Ansar Abbasi in his column translates it as “The recommendations for the appointment of judges for the superior courts shall be undertaken through a Commission. This commission will comprise of following individuals.

1) The Commission’s chairman shall be a Chief Justice, who has never previously taken oath under PCO”. Mr. Ansar Abbasi himself mentions that “according to this Article Mr. Iftikhar Chaudhry (deposed) Chief Justice cannot become the chairman of this commission which has been entrusted with the task of making recommendations for the appointment of new judges. And for this any chief justice who in past did not take oath under PCO stands eligible to become chairman of this commission”. Our question to Mr. Ansar Abbasi when he openly admits that according to COD’s Article 3(a) Mr. Iftikhar Chaudhry (deposed) CJ cannot become chairman of the commission that will make recommendations for the appointment of judges to superior courts and is not eligible for the task then how can he according to Article 3(a) be eligible to hold the highest and honorable office of the superior court? Knowing this reality in its totality and fully well would it be right and legal to demand his restoration?

A very amusing point that MR Ansar Abbasi brings forth with regards to Article 3(a) in his column; it says “this sub-article has nothing to do with the current judges and that few people according to a well thought of plan are interpreting Article 3(a) in such a way so as to make the restoration of Mr. Iftikhar Chaudhry controversial and create confusion in common people”. But after explaining Article 3(a) he says “the authors of COD after much thought did not use the word “The Chief Justice” of Pakistan but used “a chief justice” since they knew that the chief justice of that time and those who will follow as chief justice will be those who took oath under the 2001 PCO”.

Quite strikingly Mr. Abbasi accepted the fact that in May 2006 this particular Article in the COD was specially included for the chief justice in office at that time and his brother justices who had taken oath under PCO so that Mr. Iftikhar Chaudhry and other justices who took oath under General Pervez Musharraf’s PCO will stand disqualified for appointment as superior court judges. Moreover this is absolutely true that on May 14, 2006 when Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto Shaheed and Mian Nawaz Shareef signed the COD, both the leaders had no clue and nor did the senior leadership of two parties knew anything or for that matter the leaders of lawyers movement had any idea that on march 9 a reference would be filed against Mr. Iftikhar Chaudhry the sitting chief justice of Pakistan, that on November 3 General Musharraf would again impose emergency in the country and that judges would again be required by him to take new oaths under the PCO. As for making Mr. Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry controversial, it is those parties who are dragging him into political rallies and processions that are to be blamed. As a justice Mr. Iftikhar Chaudhry deserves the respect and protocol that comes with the office. Sadly & with due respect the chief justices and judges of superior courts are not only and strictly prohibited from public appearances, attending or endorsing political rallies and agendas, but even barred from attending private functions of such nature. But the honorable justice thought it right to go ahead with attending political rallies and processions and let the exalted office of chief justice go to the street and let himself become a spectacle on top of being controversial.

PML (N) leadership came up with the ludicrous argument that PCO’s mention in the COD is with reference to those judges who took oath on November 3, 2007. The question is that when the signatures were being put on charter of democracy on May 14, 2006 it was way before November 3, 2007, then whether PML (N) leadership got the premonition that on November 3, 2007 judges will take oath under the PCO? As per Ansar Abbasi if Article 3(a) of COD has no relevance with current judges or of any consequence to them then who are these particular PCO judges mentioned in the COD, since before January 2000 the PCO came in General Zia-ul-Haq’s martial law in 1977 and none of those PCO judges from General Zia’s time were present in the judiciary of 2007. Accordingly it proves that in the COD announced on May 14, 2006 the very mention of PCO refers to the PCO of General Musharraf introduced in January 2000 and those who took oath on it.

The fact is that in the COD the issue of judges taking oath under PCO has been dealt with utmost seriousness and in Article 3(a) clause (2) with reference to procedure for appointment of judges in superior courts that it clearly says commission that makes recommendations for the appointment of judges, its members shall be Provincial High Court Chief Justices who have never taken oath under PCO. In case the criteria are not met then it will be senior most judges who will be members of the commission and those who have never taken oath under PCO. If in January 2000 there had been no PCO by General Musharraf and Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry and his brother justices not taken oath under the PCO and provided constitutional protection to General Musharraf’s dictatorship, then it is our firm belief that in COD the mention of judges who took oath under PCO and their appointment would not have been mentioned as an Article in order to disqualify them. But on the contrary this would not have been an issue at all.

Mian Nawaz Shareef, Qazi Husaain Ahmed, Imran Khan and their like minded political leaders, lawyers, Ansar Abbasi and others of same thought look down on the current Supreme Court Chief Justice Mr. Abdul Hameed Dogar and judges appointed under the PCO after the emergency of November 3, 2007 and don’t spare a moment in maligning them and consider them unconstitutional. Mian Nawaz Sharif has taken the extreme position of not recognizing them and has not hesitated in using derogatory and uncouth language such as “anti-state elements”, “traitors” and ”anti-Pakistan” and keeps using it in public. We have one question to all the above mentioned personalities and with all due respect we ask if Mr. Chief Justice Abdul Hameed Dogar and other judges taking oath under PCO on November 3, 2007 in their eyes was a serious and punishable crime then Mr. Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry’s oath on January 4, 2000 under General Musharraf’s first PCO too falls in the category of a serious and punishable crime. Then why do they present this one judge who committed the same unconstitutional act as a hero and the other as a traitor? Was General Musharraf’s PCO in 2000 was correct and in accordance with the constitution of Pakistan? If this is true then the Chief Justice of that time Mr. Saeed-uz-Zaman Siddiqui, Justice Nasir Aslam Zahid, Justice Wajeehuddin Ahmed, Justice Kamal Mansoor Alam, Justice Mamoon Kazi, and Justice Khalil-ur-Rahman would not have said no to taking oath under PCO and would not have said that we have already taken oath under the constitution of Pakistan and therefore we will not take a second oath under the PCO. These were the true heroes of judiciary those who demonstrated strength of character and were brave enough to not to take oath under PCO and instead submitted their resignations. This most important chapter in Pakistan’s legal history went unnoticed by Mian Nawaz Shareef and by the leadership of PML (N) who are always at the forefront of all kinds of foul and malicious attacks on Supreme Court. Rather they never came out on streets at that time, nor protested or bothered to become champions of judiciary. Nor did the lawyers who are ardently campaigning for restoration of deposed Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry and equate it with freedom of judiciary ever bothered to come out at that time and launch protests. Neither did Mr. Ansar Abbasi custodian of the pen and freedom of expression bothered to come out and lodge angry protests and columns. The sad irony is that lawyers and those political leaders who are at the forefront of long marches, waving angry fists and raging in fury never bothered to come out for Chief Justice of that time Mr. Saeed-uz-Zaman Siddiqui, Justice Nasir Aslam Zahid, Justice Wajeehuddin Ahmed, Justice Kamal Mansoor Alam, Justice Mamoon Kazi, and Justice Khalil-ur-Rahman. Not even a mild protest or statement from these lawyers was registered or launched in favor of these true heroes of judiciary. Why this dual approach and where was the civil society then? And what were the prominent members of ex-servicemen’s society doing at that time or were they hiding in some hole? Where was their sense of democracy at that time? Had Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry taken the honorable and brave step of siding with the judges who refused to take oath under General Musharraf’s PCO in 2000 then MQM too would have been at his side, as MQM’s demand and stand is principled, MQM questions as to why is only the restoration of the Nov 2 2007 judges being demanded & why not the judges who refused to take oath under PCO in 2000 and are true heroes who stood up like true men and should all be restored.

MQM strictly adheres to the principled stand that if Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry’s taking oath in 2000 under General Musharraf’s PCO is acceptable and correct according to Ansar Abbasi and his confidantes and like-minded then how is that judges who took oath on November 3, 2007 under General Musharraf’s second PCO could be illegal ? If one judge who took oath under one PCO is judiciary’s hero, protector and flag bearer of the constitution and considered champion of law then how is it so that another judge who took oath under second PCO can be declared as the villain of judiciary ? and one who abrogated constitution ? If the oath taken on November 3, 2007 by judges was wrong then how is that oath taken earlier in 2000 under the first PCO by General Musharraf by justice Iftikhar Chaudhry was legit and right in the eyes of law ? Asking to restore judges appointed under the first PCO and taking out long marches in their support and when it comes to judges who took oath under second PCO showing utter and abject disregard , calling them as unconstitutional and demanding for them to be removed is nothing short of blatant dichotomy in the character and logic of those who are espousing Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry’s restoration. If the PCO of January 2000 was right and legit then how that is the PCO of November 3 2007 was wrong and illegal? If the second PCO was wrong and illegal then how can the first PCO be declared as right and legit?

Ansar Abbasi and his like minded political and religious leadership, members of legal community curse and accuse General Musharraf for breaking the constitution, twice introducing PCO, keeping both President & Army Chief offices, fighting elections in uniform and distorting the constitution of the country. Alongside they also demand the restoration of the judiciary of November 2, 2007. Basically they want the restoration of the judiciary whose Chief Justice was Iftikhar Chaudhry. For those with short memories let me remind them with great respect that General Musharraf’s takeover on October 12 1999 and his non-democratic step and his chief executive’s position was validated under doctrine of necessity by whom? In 2000 General Musharraf was allowed to postpone elections for two years by whom? Again in 2002 and in 2005 General Musharraf had both the offices of Chief of Army Staff as well as President and a constitutional writ that was filed against it in Supreme Court was rejected by whom?

Yet again on September 28th 2007 who gave permission to General Musharraf to fight elections in uniform? Was it the Dogar Judiciary as cynically put by Nawaz Shareef or was it the judiciary of November 2, 2007 that rejected the constitutional writs against General Musharraf regarding his Chief of Army Staff uniform, these writs according to Article 184(3) were declared as non maintainable and rejected by whom?

If Mr. Ansar Abbasi and his like minded friends and cronies call General Musharraf a dictator and usurper then who gave sanctuary and constitutional protection to this dictator’s extra-constitutional steps?

In due consideration and full acknowledgement of these facts and in light of this evidence Mr. Ansar Abbasi should sincerely ponder and seriously reflect as to whom is the true violator of the Charter of Democracy? Whether it is MQM or was it Nawaz Shareef and his political allies and confidantes who in demanding the restoration of PCO judges are standing accused of violating their own charter of democracy? If Ansar Abbasi and his confidantes and like minded political friends think and view the COD as that sacrosanct document that if its is not practiced then the entire judiciary, parliamentary system and democracy can be declared as non constitutional and can lead to the turning of tables on democracy and its lynching then principled approach and scruples tell us that if one has faith in COD then one should not talk of restoration of an individual who took oath under a dictator’s PCO, someone who provided full protection to the dictators extra constitutional transgressions. And if one only wants to talk out loud on the COD and not to practice it in spirit , then those who talk out the loudest on the COD should instead of long march go to the Constitution Avenue in Islamabad and burn this COD in the presence of public and in their court and to stop fooling people and pray for their forgiveness.

Would Mr. Ansar Abbasi exhibit moral courage to seek nation’s forgiveness for supporting Mr. Iftikhar Chaudhry a person who took oath under General Musharraf’s PCO, a person who provided constitutional protection on many occasions to General Musharraf’s extra-constitutional steps? MQM’s leader Mr. Altaf Hussain sacrificed his party’s interest in lieu of the sensitive national security situation, the perils that democracy is facing today and for its survival in Pakistan. But is that what Mr. Ansar Abbasi would like to see that we put the entire country at stake for one person’s ego arrogance and his employment? Would MR Ansar Abbasi like to sacrifice the entire country, throw democracy in tailspin and put it to the torment of long marches, shutter-down strikes, chaos and lawlessness in these perilous times? Is MR Ansar Abbasi ready to back a long march and sit-downs that aims to destabilize the elected parliaments and to rock democracy’s boat and only to lead to have it trampled under some new dictator’s boots? Mr. Ansar Abbasi and his confidantes and like minded friends will for the sake of democracy have to select between an individual and our country’s democratic system. Is Mr. Abbasi he ready to do it? REFERENCE: A Riposte to Ansar Abbasi By Mustafa Azizabadi Member – Central Rabita Committee & In charge Central Media cell. MQM http://www.mqm.org/English-News/feb-2009/azizabadi-article07-02-09.htm

Sometimes, investigative journalism in Pakistan remains merely a case of whole-scale copying of files handed out by aggrieved bureaucrats whose only bone of contention lies in being on the losing end of the commission dispute.

The journalists are a funny breed these days; they demand western standards of accountability and governance from our elected leaders but, as institutions, fail to follow the same standards ourselves. Let us investigate!

Our investigative journalists regularly name and shame our elected leaders, yet they refuse to question the ways the executive functions in this country. Since official ministerial communication is carried out by the concerned secretary, no corruption can take place without the abatement of the bureaucracy. Sometimes, investigative journalism in Pakistan remains merely a case of whole-scale copying of files handed out by aggrieved bureaucrats whose only bone of contention lies in being on the losing end of the commission dispute.

Mir Ibrahim Rehman (c) at his master’s convocation earlier this year
Guess who was spotted on November 9 in Washington D.C. at a reception for American and Pakistani media personnel thrown by US AfPak ambassador Richard Holbrooke’s media assistant Ashley Bommer? Mir Ibrahim Rehman, scion of the house of Jang and CEO of the Geo TV Network. He walked in with The Friday Times editor and Dunya TV’s Najam Sethi but stayed long after Sethi left the party.

Mir Ibrahim (MIR) apparently jetted in for a mysterious three-day visit to the US, during which, our sources say, the main objective was to convince the US administration that Geo was neither anti-US nor anti-democracy, the line being peddled by the Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) government. MIR also wished to gather official American support for the Jang Groupagainst the PPP boycott of the group as an instance of an assault on freedom of the media.

Our sources claim that MIR did not find too much traction among US officials against the idea of a media boycott, perhaps because the Obama administration itself has a similar boycott against Fox News (albeit without the shoe-throwing rent-a-demos and vile grafitti scrawlsagainst Fox News owners). However, what is particularly interesting about the Jang Group’s attempts to woo the American establishment is the fact that there has been apparently a lot of discussion within the US government about whether it should support and even subsidize a media group that has no qualms about running shrill propaganda against the US, and sometimes even promoting a pro-Taliban line. In particular, Hamid Mir’s contribution to whipping up Blackwater hysteria in Pakistan, Ansar Abbasi’s rants about Western puppets, and the space given to nutjobs such as Zaid Hamid (Aag TV) and Ahmad Quraishi (Aag TV and The News) have apparently raised quite a few eyebrows in the US administration.

The Americans have reason to be upset with the Jang Group, and MIR has reasons to find their upset unsettling. The running of the banal American propaganda Voice of America (VoA) programme Khabron Se Aagay[Beyond the Headlines] as an ‘advertorial’ on Geo since 2005 has netted the Jang Group and its owners, by some accounts, millions of US taxpayer dollars. Although the exact ‘compensation package’ doled out to Geo by the US government is still secret, it should be noted that the deal between Geo and VoA was mediated during the Bush-Musharraf era by the then Information Secretary Anwar Mahmood and advertising whiz-kid Asif Salahuddin, the latter of whom is reputed not to touch ‘small’ deals. Apparently, part of MIR’s discussions with the US administration included those on the future of the Geo-VoA deal.

Incidentally, while Najam Sethi was ostensibly in the US for medical check-ups and may have been present at the Bommer reception only coincidentally, as we have reported in the past, he too has been trying to persuade American-backed NGOs to fund a new ‘liberal’ channel to be headed by him.

Coming back to MIR, it seems that more than American upset, a potential threat of withdrawal of lucrative financial support may be the trigger for a panic at the Jang Group. As they say, bullshit may walk but it’s money that talks. I have a strong feeling that you may well see the (media) house line shifting very soon. If you suddenly begin to miss the casual anti-US vitriol in the group’s publications and on Geo, you’ll know why.

Jang Group & Veracity of Transparency International & IRI Survey.http://chagataikhan.blogspot.com/2010/11/jang-group-veracity-of-transparency.html Mob of Kamran Khan i.e. Mr. Ansar Abbasi, Mr Shaheen Sehbai, Mr. Irfan Siddiqui and Mohammad Malick are usually very fond of the reports of Transparency International and Survey of International Republican Institute (IRI) particularly when they carry “Corruption Reports on Pakistan. Quite funny isn’t it that the same group often raise hell against US Central Intelligence, Mossad and countless others and these very journalists “conveniently” forget that such surveys/reports could be a brainchild of the Organizations on the payrolls of the same US Central Intelligence Agency and Mossad. One of the Professional Colleague Mubashir Luqman openly said Transparency International an Israeli/CIA Agent:)

[…] Abbasi may have invented from thin air these conspiracy theories, or they may have been fed to him by intelligence agencies. But the trick has worked because The Guardian has now repeated the claim on their respected pages, […]

[…] have been trying to bring to light the question of intelligence agencies and other vested interests using journalists as puppets. Perhaps some times there is money changing hands, perhaps other times a reporter is awed by access […]